So I'm watching the 1982 miniseries with Lino Ventura, and I have a question. Who is Enjolras in this version? I can't figure it out. I'm currently reading the Brick (for the first time), so I don't really know how Enjolras is supposed to be. Thanks for the help!

Dark hair, dark eyes (Brickjolras has blond hair and blue eyes), an earring, wears a red scarf...thing, does most of the talking in the student scenes, is the only one not sitting on the wall in a student scene (he's the speechifying one!), and is the first one Courfeyrac introduces to Marius. If you listen carefully enough you can catch all the students' names when Courfeyrac says them, although it is hard if you don't know French.

Well, all of the boys look similar so it's hard to tell the first time if you don't know French, especially because the actorss don't really fit the book descriptions and a couple boys are cut out. I had to go back and watch the introductory sequence again, myself.

Well, all of the boys look similar so it's hard to tell the first time if you don't know French, especially because the actorss don't really fit the book descriptions and a couple boys are cut out.

They do (unless you watch really closely and occasionally stop to memorise/identify faces in great detail)! The only one that really stands out (besides earringed E. - though the scarf is actually more flashy) is Combeferre with his beard and glasses.I've actually confused that version's Courfeyrac and Bossuet (or I think it's him anyway! I think that one's the same one who has a mistress who lives above the Corinthe, and that one is addressed by the latter as Lesgles) a few times because they use Bossuet in a few made-up scenes where he is hanging out at the Gorbeau house with Marius (and Enjolras) and flirts briefly with Éponine, and I long assumed that was Courfeyrac (just because that version's Courfeyrac is generally an overflowing well of entertainment) until it occurred to me that if it was the actor must have lost two pounds in the face alone between that scene and the previous one (and put them back on for the next).

Woah, that was Lesgle?! I thought that was Courfeyrac. :/ And yeah, Bossuet's the one with the girlfriend. Bahorel, Grantaire, and Lesgle look exactly the same if you don't stop to study them and it's only the differences in character that really make 'em stand out... at least I think so, Grantaire is the one who gets up during the meeting and says something causing everyone to kinda go crazy, right? I need to rewatch this...

I think it's him! At any rate, you have Courfeyrac looking like this (Grantaire on the right) (and Marius on the left, for those who haven't seen the film) and this (okay, blurry, but you get an idea of his stature/face-shape) and the fellow in the Gorbeau scene (here [E. on the right] and here and here) looks thinner, longer-nosed, blacker-haired, and slightly cleaner? But I'm never completely sure. (He's still Courfeyrac in my head. Since he does Courfeyrac things.) I don't appear to have any screenshots of the two together, so they might actually be the same guy after all. I think the one from the Gorbeau scene is sitting at the table here (on the very right [Grantaire in the back ... Bahorel on the left, presumably?]), though (except in that scene he also has a moustache?), and Courfeyrac only turns up with Marius.

I think in the meeting scene Grantaire is mostly putting himself forward for the Barrière du Maine (which is a nice touch because, you know, it happens in the book, except the point is lost because the film never shows what he ends up doing there) (I seriously adore the details this film gets - like the Napoléon poster in Marius' room [still there when E. and whoever come to visit!] ... but then it always stops halfway through [like how Grantaire does sleep through the insurrection but gets up to be shot alongside several others, or Éponine gets to write 'les cognes sont là' but they don't use it and let Marius fire the alarm shot instead). He's pretty distinguishable in the introduction scene because he's all in black (I think).

Bossuet (on the right) (definitely not the one from the Gorbeau scene) (... and yes, Courfeyrac does spend the entire film making silly faces) (AND HE IS ALWAYS prancing around or leaning in and out of people's personal spaces or just ... rocking in his seat or whathaveyou, so he is ALWAYS BLURRED)

... suggesting that the fellow in the Gorbeau scene is probably Courfeyrac after all (unless it's Bahorel ... he might look like that with his hair not blown back) (I'll go check a few other scenes and report back), and I effectively managed to mistake him for himself the first few times around before suddenly stopping to recognise him *facepalm*I so wish that film had had a Prouvaire - I mean, they get Grantaire all dressed up as an existentialist or whathaveyou, they get Combeferre just screaming 'geek', they give Enjolras a Saint-Justian earring, none of which it says in the book as such but all of which is fanon-compatible in more or less ridiculous ways, so can you imagine what Prouvaire could have been!

ETA: Bahorel again (who I now think is the one who is sitting on the right in the meeting scene, with L'aigle on the left). IDK, the Gorbeau scene man might be him, nose-wise, but in this scene he doesn't resemble him any more than Courfeyrac does ... ?

ETA (II): RIGHT. MYSTERY SOLVED. Gorbeau fellow is Bahorel. On the assumption that Bahorel is sitting on the right here, because that is Gorbeau fellow's nose. Isn't it?

(ETA [III]: The one with the nose is also the one talking with Gavroche here [and addressed by the latter as Bahorel], which I like to think is deliberate considering Gavroche's admiration for Bahorel in the book.)

And to get back to the thread's original topic, see, you can always distinguish E. by his red scarf.

Last edited by Frédérique on Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:35 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Okay, regardless of all, this deserves its own reply: BOUNCY COURFEYRAC. I mean, he just keeps doing these things and it doesn't say 'Courfeyrac was always bouncing around' in the text but ... isn't it just so right?

I love this Courfeyrac sooo much. He's bouncy and hyperactive. They're all bouncy and hyperactive, mostly. The scene in the park when they are all running around and acting like six year olds is just... d'awwww.

eta: I will never get over how INEXPLICABLY GRIMY this series is though. EVERYTHING: COVERED IN GRIME WITHOUT EXCEPTION.

I actually like that in some places? Like the 1957 film has everything not-dirty even the Thenardiers and stuff, so... But the students shouldn't be grimy. But it is realistic dirt! You must give them points for that.

Ditto-o! And that scene! Their little dramatic-but-playful tune! And! Yes!

The grime works well as a visual (because it's realistic) (although I do believe that Courfeyrac could wash a bit more often), in my opinion, but is problematic as an image, in that ... there is so little light around (and not just because E. isn't blond) it sort of eliminates the book's constant undercurrent of hope. Especially in combination with the changed ending. This is a film you watch and say 'yeah, I really do get why it's got misérables in the title'. Whereas the '57 one is all BRIGHT EFFING COLOURS, which are super-pretty - I adore their Rue Plumet garden - but also ... hm. It rains about as seldom in that film as it rains pretty much constantly in this one. (Perhaps that's the origin of "A Little Fall of Rain". What problem can a little more probably pose when it's pouring all the time anyway?) (And viewed like that, it actually makes sense as a sort of transfiguration of the 'agony of death after the agony of life' concept. Haha.)

Ditto-o! And that scene! Their little dramatic-but-playful tune! And! Yes!The grime works well as a visual (because it's realistic) (although I do believe that Courfeyrac could wash a bit more often), in my opinion, but is problematic as an image, in that ... there is so little light around (and not just because E. isn't blond) it sort of eliminates the book's constant undercurrent of hope. Especially in combination with the changed ending. This is a film you watch and say 'yeah, I really do get why it's got misérables in the title'. Whereas the '57 one is all BRIGHT EFFING COLOURS, which are super-pretty - I adore their Rue Plumet garden - but also ... hm. It rains about as seldom in that film as it rains pretty much constantly in this one. (Perhaps that's the origin of "A Little Fall of Rain". What problem can a little more probably pose when it's pouring all the time anyway?) (And viewed like that, it actually makes sense as a sort of transfiguration of the 'agony of death after the agony of life' concept. Haha.)

"and not just because E isn't blond" ... That's an interesting point re:hope. I think the movie makers seem to be emphasizing a different part of the story than in other adaptions, here. Probably they were focusing more on the 'misérables' aspect of the story? It's a very good adaption but I think some aspects are missing... the undercurrent of hope is still there, it's just downplayed. Which is basically what you said, so, Uhm.

ETA: "Someone heard c'set ne rien" Haha. This adaption does seem to have lots of rain, doesn't it... much of the direction is similar to the musical, too, because the same guy directed both things.